BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH bpf] bpf: Reject negative const offsets for buffer pointers
@ 2026-07-03  3:51 Sun Jian
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Sun Jian @ 2026-07-03  3:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: ast, daniel, john.fastabend, andrii, eddyz87, memxor, martin.lau,
	song, yonghong.song, jolsa, emil, shuah, mmullins, linux-kernel,
	linux-kselftest, Sun Jian

The verifier rejects variable offsets for PTR_TO_TP_BUFFER and PTR_TO_BUF
accesses, but it currently accepts a constant negative offset produced by
pointer arithmetic.

For example, a raw tracepoint writable program can load ctx[0] as a
PTR_TO_TP_BUFFER, move it by -8, and then read from the adjusted pointer.
The register is still tracked as tp_buffer(imm=-8), but the access is
before the tracepoint writable buffer base and should be rejected.

Check the signed effective buffer offset before updating max_tp_access or
other buffer max access accounting. Reject negative effective offsets and
use the checked end offset for max access accounting.

Add a verifier test that rejects a raw tracepoint writable program using a
negative constant offset.

Fixes: 9df1c28bb752 ("bpf: add writable context for raw tracepoints")
Signed-off-by: Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c                         | 41 ++++++++++++++++---
 .../bpf/progs/verifier_raw_tp_writable.c      | 16 ++++++++
 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 21a365d436a5..421ca118fcbf 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -5326,14 +5326,18 @@ static int check_max_stack_depth(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 static int __check_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				 const char *buf_info,
 				 const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
-				 argno_t argno, int off, int size)
+				 argno_t argno, int off, int size,
+				 u32 *access_end)
 {
+	s64 start, var_off;
+
 	if (off < 0) {
 		verbose(env,
 			"%s invalid %s buffer access: off=%d, size=%d\n",
 			reg_arg_name(env, argno), buf_info, off, size);
 		return -EACCES;
 	}
+
 	if (!tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
 		char tn_buf[48];
 
@@ -5344,6 +5348,29 @@ static int __check_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		return -EACCES;
 	}
 
+	var_off = (s64)reg->var_off.value;
+	if (check_add_overflow(var_off, (s64)off, &start)) {
+		verbose(env,
+			"%s invalid %s buffer access: off=%d, var_off=%lld\n",
+			reg_arg_name(env, argno), buf_info, off, var_off);
+		return -EACCES;
+	}
+
+	if (start < 0) {
+		verbose(env,
+			"%s invalid negative %s buffer offset: off=%d, var_off=%lld\n",
+			reg_arg_name(env, argno), buf_info, off, var_off);
+		return -EACCES;
+	}
+
+	if (start > U32_MAX || size < 0 ||
+	    check_add_overflow((u32)start, (u32)size, access_end)) {
+		verbose(env,
+			"%s invalid %s buffer access: off=%lld, size=%d\n",
+			reg_arg_name(env, argno), buf_info, start, size);
+		return -EACCES;
+	}
+
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -5351,13 +5378,15 @@ static int check_tp_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				  const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
 				  argno_t argno, int off, int size)
 {
+	u32 access_end;
 	int err;
 
-	err = __check_buffer_access(env, "tracepoint", reg, argno, off, size);
+	err = __check_buffer_access(env, "tracepoint", reg, argno, off, size,
+				    &access_end);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
 
-	env->prog->aux->max_tp_access = max(reg->var_off.value + off + size,
+	env->prog->aux->max_tp_access = max(access_end,
 					    env->prog->aux->max_tp_access);
 
 	return 0;
@@ -5370,13 +5399,15 @@ static int check_buffer_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 			       u32 *max_access)
 {
 	const char *buf_info = type_is_rdonly_mem(reg->type) ? "rdonly" : "rdwr";
+	u32 access_end;
 	int err;
 
-	err = __check_buffer_access(env, buf_info, reg, argno, off, size);
+	err = __check_buffer_access(env, buf_info, reg, argno, off, size,
+				    &access_end);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
 
-	*max_access = max(reg->var_off.value + off + size, *max_access);
+	*max_access = max(access_end, *max_access);
 
 	return 0;
 }
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_raw_tp_writable.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_raw_tp_writable.c
index 14a0172e2141..4055a6443bc2 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_raw_tp_writable.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_raw_tp_writable.c
@@ -47,4 +47,20 @@ l0_%=:	/* shift the buffer pointer to a variable location */\
 	: __clobber_all);
 }
 
+SEC("raw_tracepoint.w")
+__description("raw_tracepoint_writable: reject negative const offset")
+__failure
+__msg("invalid negative tracepoint buffer offset")
+__naked void tracepoint_writable_reject_negative_const_offset(void)
+{
+	asm volatile ("					\
+	r6 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 0);				\
+	r6 += -8;					\
+	r0 = *(u64 *)(r6 + 0);				\
+	exit;						\
+"	:
+	:
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
 char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2026-07-03  3:51 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-03  3:51 [PATCH bpf] bpf: Reject negative const offsets for buffer pointers Sun Jian

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox